Back to Search Start Over

Continuous regional arterial infusion versus intravenous administration of the protease inhibitor nafamostat mesilate for predicted severe acute pancreatitis: a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 2 trial.

Authors :
Hirota, Morihisa
Shimosegawa, Tooru
Kitamura, Katsuya
Takeda, Kazunori
Takeyama, Yoshifumi
Mayumi, Toshihiko
Ito, Tetsuhide
Takenaka, Mamoru
Iwasaki, Eisuke
Sawano, Hirotaka
Ishida, Etsuji
Miura, Shin
Masamune, Atsushi
Nakai, Yousuke
Mitoro, Akira
Maguchi, Hiroyuki
Kimura, Kenji
Sanuki, Tsuyoshi
Ito, Tetsuya
Haradome, Hiroki
Source :
Journal of Gastroenterology; Mar2020, Vol. 55 Issue 3, p342-352, 11p, 2 Diagrams, 2 Charts
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

<bold>Background: </bold>Continuous regional arterial infusion (CRAI) of protease inhibitor nafamostat mesilate (NM) is used in the context of predicted severe acute pancreatitis (SAP) to prevent the development of pancreatic necrosis. Although this therapy is well known in Japan, its efficacy and safety remain unclear.<bold>Methods: </bold>This investigator-initiated and -driven, multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial (UMIN000020868) enrolled 39 patients with predicted SAP and low enhancement of the pancreatic parenchyma on computed tomography (CT). Twenty patients were assigned to the CRAI group, while 19 served as controls and were administered NM at the same dose intravenously (IV group). The primary endpoint was the development of pancreatic necrosis as determined by CT on Day 14, judged by blinded central review.<bold>Results: </bold>There was no difference between the CRAI and IV groups regarding the percentages of participants who developed pancreatic necrosis (more than 1/3 of the pancreas: 25.0%, range 8.7-49.1% vs. 15.8%, range 3.4-39.6%, respectively, Pā€‰=ā€‰0.694; more than 2/3 of the pancreas: 20%, range 5.7-43.7% vs. 5.3%, range 0.1-26.0%, respectively, Pā€‰=ā€‰0.341). The early analgesic effect was evaluated based on 24-h cumulative fentanyl consumption and additional administration by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. The results showed that the CRAI group used significantly less analgesic. There were two adverse events related to CRAI, namely bleeding and splenic infarction.<bold>Conclusions: </bold>CRAI with NM did not inhibit the development of pancreatic necrosis although early analgesic effect of CRAI was superior to that of IV. Less-invasive IV therapy can be considered a viable alternative to CRAI therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09441174
Volume :
55
Issue :
3
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Journal of Gastroenterology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
141771762
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-019-01644-z